The author is a Forbes contributor. The opinions expressed are those of the writer.

Loading ...

Loading ...

This story appears in the {{article.article.magazine.pretty_date}} issue of {{article.article.magazine.pubName}}. Subscribe

(Image credit: Getty Images via @daylife)

I don’t hate Facebook. Though I find it increasingly useless as a social networking tool, I have a great respect for what Mark Zuckerberg has built. The social network permeates practically the entire web and stringing together 850 million people on one website is a remarkable achievement, not just in the history of the Internet, but in the history of mankind.

But the Instagram acquisition yesterday reaffirms my instincts about a very simple reason for shying away from a Facebook investment: there’s too much churn in social media. Though the precise reasons behind the acquisition are known only to a handful of insiders, many interpret the purchase as a defensive move.

Was Instagram a Facebook killer? Hardly. But in a mere 18 months, a company with 13 employees created a photo sharing experience that cut at the heart of the networking giant's product. Consider what 100 million people enthusiastically sharing photos outside of Facebook’s grasp would mean. I’m sure that same thought horrified the company’s management. In this light, the Instagram acquisition was indeed a wise move.

The lesson I take is that in social media, there’s always room for a better experience. Legacy products like Facebook's are by definition hindered by usership and technology, consistently leaving space for scrappy upstarts to create more seamless experiences from scratch. The tech vanguard, for instance, has long since moved the conversation elsewhere, a sentiment summed up in a memorable tweet (which will remain unattributed since I can’t find the source) that said, in effect, “On Twitter I see strangers I want to have a beer with; On Facebook I see ‘friends’ I want to throw a beer at.”

Granted, the company has so far done a commendable job updating user experience - a necessity no matter how loudly people complain. But there will always be openings for small, creative tech teams (like Instagram) to hack away at Facebook’s user base by building something better. Network effects, though meaningful, are not insurmountable and as the already negligible cost of launching a web-based product continues to decline, Facebook will have to fend off more and more young companies gnawing at its core. The odds are that Zuckerberg will one-day face an opponent that can’t be bought.

For those unconvinced, consider this: which of the other top 50 companies in the world (among which Facebook ranks with its $100 billion market cap) could feel existentially threatened by a 13-person startup with zero revenue?